BIFR Vs. UMI SPECIAL STEEL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. A. Nos. 3376 of 2012 & 654 of 2016 138/1.4.2016 There are 68 persons in the first Interlocutory Application, who claim to be the workmen of the Company under liquidation and seek to be included in the list of workmen on the date of winding of the Company for receiving their wages and other claims arising out of sale proceeds of the Company under liquidation.

(2.) In the second Interlocutory Application there are 12 persons, who also make a similar claim. It is not out of place to observe here that the Company went into liquidation on 5.8.2003 after the proceeding before BIFR for its revival failed. The statement of affairs of the Company were submitted in terms of Section 454 by the Directors of the Company containing the list of workmen on the rolls of Company at the time of liquidation on 21.10.2003. 368 workmen were shown to be borne on the rolls of the Company as per statement of affairs submitted, out of which, 236 are pursuing their claims. This Court in discharge of powers under the Companies Act, considered the statement of affairs and after giving sufficient notice even by paper publication for any other persons/creditors to raise their claims for realization of debts from the Company under liquidation, passed an order on 26th April, 2007 directing the official liquidator to pay 50% of the wages to those 236 workmen out of sale proceeds of the Company. In that sense, after due exercise and proper notice to all concerned, the list of 236 workmen were taken to be final for the purpose of payment of their dues out of sale proceeds of the assets of the Company. These applicants in their interlocutory application have tried to show that they were also on the rolls of the Company and were left out in the statement of affairs submitted by the Board of Directors which should not be a ground to suffer them from the legitimate dues to which they are entitled from the sale proceeds of the assets of the Company. These persons through supplementary affidavit have enclosed certain I.D. Cards and certain statements showing receipt of wages for particular years. The I.D. Cards do not contain any date and the statement of payment enclosed to their I.A. shows certain wages paid either in the years 1997, 1998 or 1992 etc. It is beyond doubt that the applicants in the first interlocutory application have come after a delay of 2027 days after the list of workmen was finalized and this Court directed for payment of 50% wages out of sale proceeds of the Company to those 236 workmen.

(3.) The workmen in the second Interlocutory Application have come before this Court even after further delay i.e, total 3144 days. All these workmen have sought to explain the delay on the ground of being out of Ranchi at their different places of work or at their native places and their ignorance about any notice issued through paper publication pursuant to the orders of the Court.